Well I don't think we really need to label people permanently, at least not with these labels.
I've always called myself an avid gamer because it's my most time-consuming hobby but I'm not obsessed with it. That would be opposed to what was traditionally called a casual gamer before this generation - someone who only plays games in general every once in awhile. It never mattered what types of games they played.
I've also called myself a veteran gamer because I've been playing games my whole life.
"New gamer" is a term that can be pretty accurately applied to most of the people who are generally called "casual" these days. Especially when talking about the Wii and Nintendo's blue ocean approach, "new" and "veteran" seem to be the most appropriate labels to me, if we have to generalize.
And different labels can be used for different moods, even for the same person. I'm really hardcore when it comes to Assassin's Creed (I 100%ed AC2 and am working on doing the same for the first game in my second playthrough), but I'm pretty casual when it comes to something like SSBB (I only play occasionally just for fun... I rarely even win a match, but it's still a blast playing with people I know).
JordanElek
That's something I can agree with, it makes more sense. Defining gamers as veteran or new is better than casual and hardcore. The problem I have with casual and hardcore is it's tough to determine.
Log in to comment